Against Callimachus (33-35)

And let no one think that I exaggerate or pass due bounds, because I, a defendant in a private suit, have spoken in this fashion. For this law-suit is concerned not merely with the sum of money specified in the indictment; for me, it is true, this is the issue, but for you it is that of which I have just spoken; on this subject no one would be able to speak in fitting fashion nor could he fix an adequate penalty.

For this law-suit difiers so greatly from other private suits in this respect that, while the latter are of concern to the litigants only, in this private law-suit common interests of the city are likewise at stake. In trying this case you are bound by two oaths: one is the customary judicial oath which you take in all ordinary cases, and the other is that oath which you swore when you ratified the covenant of Amnesty. If in render an unjust verdict in this case, you will be violating not only the laws of the city, but also the laws common to all men. Consequently, it is not fitting that your votes should be based upon favor, or upon mere equity, nor upon anything else than upon the oaths you took when you made the covenant of Amnesty.

Now that it is right, and is expedient and just that you should decide thus concerning the covenant of Amnesty not even Callimachus himself, I think, will gainsay; but he intends, I suppose, to bewail his present poverty and the misfortune which has befallen him and to say that his fate will be dreadful and cruel if now under the democracy he must pay the assessed fine for the money of which under the oligarchy he was deprived,[*] and also if then because he possessed property he was forced to go into exile, yet now, at a time when he ought to get satisfaction for wrongs done him, he is to be deprived of his civic rights.[*]